Now that Google has decided its entire history was just a waste of time and that Net Neutrality just isn't trendy anymore, what's a web admin to do? I would now rather die a fiery death than support a company intent on destroying virtually all small business on the internet.

So, what alternative services are available out there for someone who used to use Google for analytics and advertising? Which ones are best and why?

Oh, and is there a good search engine that doesn't take as long to load as Yahoo and MSN?

Isn't that just what rich people do when they've bought everything they want and are bored with their money?

One would hope. Aristocrats/Royalty tend not to be as giving as self-made business men.

Bill Gates dedicates most of his time to charity. Warren Buffet gave him a large sum of money, but Warren said he is not good with setting up charities, and he felt Melinda and Bill were far better candidates. I think it's just a case of going something good, as they are financially independent and don't really have to work.

Stomme_poes
—
2010-09-13T13:27:53Z —
#4

The truth be told Bill Gates now dedicates his time to charitable events and humanitarian gathering around the world, so maybe he does not sound so evil now.

Isn't that just what rich people do when they've bought everything they want and are bored with their money? I don't fault them for it, but I don't actually think most of them even do it for the publicity.

Google seems to have a successful formula in making money and naturally they have branched out to different areas, which they have also become successful in. With great power comes great responsibility, and we all know power corrupts. So it's only natural you feel this way.

I think we have to look at Microsoft. Years ago everybody was cursing them and saying how evil they were, and how Apple was the unadulterated version of an Operating System. Now that Apple has become popular people are turning to Linux. The truth be told Bill Gates now dedicates his time to charitable events and humanitarian gathering around the world, so maybe he does not sound so evil now.

I believe Google has a lot of power, but it knows that it's power was obtain not through deception, marketing and lies, but their open and ready they were for change. I would not be surprised if Google eventually released their own I.S.P. But I don't feel they will go against net neutrality, more of a consumer monopoly brought on by it's popularity rather than them.

I remember a while back there was a picture of Obama's wife in a monkey-like form. Google did not remove it until it had government pressure. So maybe it's the governments influence on Google which should be worried about.

Newviewit
—
2010-09-13T13:03:10Z —
#6

1 - I'm saying everyday Google seems to sell out more and more by pimping it's own products and other large corporations in the search results = no longer as useful as in the past. Every day I see Google turning more and more into a portal type sight instead of an actual unbiased search engine. Yes there is no problem with Google making a profit but in doing so and getting away from the search game they are opening a gigantic space for competitors to take over market share.

2 - False and defamatory = my opinion and free speech! Any chance you work for Google? Why would free speech be ground for a lawsuit? ... you make me laugh! Amazing what the world has turned into. I'm saying Google may do this in the future = yes they might, it is an option. There is no way you can say for 100% that they will not. If you don't believe me then have a look at what happened to privacy at Facebook, or one of Google many lawsuits about spying on customers wifi, buzz, etc.

Google will not be able to keep up with investors profit expectations on Adwords only... so they will have to develop new revenue streams. One of the options is to sell customer data to the highest bidder and further integrate their in depth knowledge of people to deliver more targeted ads... it's just that Google is doing it gradually. Google changes their privacy statement when they feel like it...nothing is written in stone. I have the right to an opinion and my opinion is that Google is turning more evil every day and becoming less useful for me.

AlexDawson
—
2010-09-13T02:38:41Z —
#7

Newviewit, the reason why I think your comments were biased an unjustified is mainly due to the fact you proclaim that Google is no longer useful because it does (big gasp) like all other commercial businesses and promotes it's own products and tries to forge an income from their free services. Google is not a charity, they are a business, they need to earn money and and I don't think anyone (including you) has the right to tell them they shouldn't be allowed to make a profit, unless you want to live in a communist society. As for biases towards large corporations, that's not true at all, paid results are simply the result of paying for the particular keywords - that doesn't mean that a large business is behind them. If you're a business (even a small one) and you're not willing to pay for advertising (which happened before the Internet - or have you not seen a Yellow Pages or Magazines or Newspapers?) then it's your (and their) own fault for not accounting for the cost of marketing.

Next there's your false and actually quite defamatory claims against GMail and Google Voice proclaiming that Google are manoeuvring themselves to sell peoples personal information to the highest bidder - which unless you have evidence to support is potentially grounds for a lawsuit. Proclaiming their evil for having information stored on their servers or for serving ads (without humans reading the content) is absurd, it's like saying that your web host is evil for having personal information stored in a server. Next there's your paranoid comments stating that by having documents stored on Google Doc's they will steal your business secrets - do you have proof that their doing it? Placing any information online makes it visible, even backing up your Word documents to your site would leave a potential for others to read it - Google are not an exception. Claiming that Google are digging their own grave for trying to make a profit (as a business) and making the slanderous allegations you have made (without proof) is nothing but opinionated gutter-talk which make you appear petty, uninformed and irrational... that's why I stated what I did.

Sega
—
2010-09-12T16:51:22Z —
#8

I heard something like this a while back. Personally I did not think anything of it at the time. I also believe in net neutrality.

So I can't say it's the first I have heard of it. Maybe there might be a hint of truth. But they never mentioned Google, more of ISPs getting in on big business by having a subscription based internet service provider were certain ports will be blocked, unless you pay extra for more areas. I mentioned this to my brother and he said he will march the streets and ask everybody to unite in protest, and I can see millions doing the same.

We can all agree that the internet is probably the best thing that has happened to the world in the last 50 years, both for information sharing and social interactions.

Maybe I have thrown a spanner in the works with the video, but I thought it would be good to share it. Maybe the video has relavense, these people have been going on like this for a while. Alex Jones also touched on this, but most of which is says can be seen as exaggeration - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-9sYNkyoBY. It's hard to define whether it's scare mongering or has truth to it.

Take a look at this too - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2XPiqhN_Ns&feature=related. The trouble is there are so many conspiracy theories on 2012, and it's hard to know if it's one of those. Apparently a red planet is suppose to hit us as well on that date too, ohh, don't forget the next stage of human evolution.

Not sure if anybody else has seen this. I saw it about a year back, but like I said I did not take much notice of it at the time.

sidneycarter15
—
2010-09-09T01:50:32Z —
#9

Call me paranoid, but I prefer not to use Google Analytics. I realize they are probably getting all of that data anyway, but why open the door and invite them in?

my_misyel
—
2010-09-07T22:45:56Z —
#10

Now this one is definitely an interesting development. What would be a good alternative to Google. None actually, they have pretty much a good hold in the market. As for them dishing out the “Don't be evil” mantra, aren't we the ones who threw it out first in order to make the most?

system
—
2010-09-06T00:09:22Z —
#11

will definetly need to search on google and look for alternative since nobody on this thread is able to provide alternative.

Stomme_poes
—
2010-09-06T07:19:59Z —
#12

In the long run, I'm sure if they do such a thing as kill net neutrality, publicity and protesting from their customers as well as a national uproar will most likely occur

Nah. Do non-nerds even know what net neutrality is? Are regular Internet customers actually following any of this?

I really would be slack-jawed surprised if there was actual publicity and protesting over the topic. National uproar? Remember those globilisation talks, where in a few cities there were some students protesting with puppet shows? Yeah, kinda lackluster. The big companies could very well be safe from major customer dissatisfaction if they make the idea of net neutrality totally dead. Nerds are aware of the issue and care. My uncle? He's running Windows 98, has cable+internet, complains to us about how he has to buy a hundred stupid sports channels just to get his car racing channel, and otherwise doesn't give it a second thought. Isn't he in the majority? (well, not with the Win98 thing)

Stomme_poes
—
2010-09-03T08:54:57Z —
#13

So we should try to manage our business making it a bit suitable to Google.

I kinda disagree. I think putting too much effort into a single search engine will render you like a Giant Panda: they only eat 6 species of bamboo or something. Very limited. This means you'll need to do a lot of work if/when the next big thing in search comes along. This doesn't mean "don't use Google" but I wouldn't throw everything onto that boat.

Newviewit
—
2010-08-30T19:16:07Z —
#14

My dislike of Google is very real for myself and various people in the industry that I talk to on a daily basis across numerous internet verticals.

Of course everyone has a right to their opinion.

Could you be so kind as to enlighten me with your rational argument and why most of what I say is irrational?

Chroniclemaster1
—
2010-08-26T19:20:48Z —
#15

[ot]

Stomme_poes said:

Off Topic:

You might like a book I picked up: Critical Mass. It's worth it just for the history of physics in the beginning!

I've heard about that (I'm an English major to boot, so I've got a fair amount of scientific and mathematical history too). Have you read Kuhn's original book on paradigm shifts? It did NOT make him popular in the scientific community for the most part. Have you read Gödel, Escher, Bach? I've heard wonderful things about it and it's supposed to be a a more accessible version of some of the things I've read in my math textbooks on Gödel. Just amazing. [/ot]

Chroniclemaster1
—
2010-08-25T22:20:08Z —
#16

Jerrac said:

First, any company that did any of the things you mention would crash and burn really fast. They might be able to sneak stuff like that in slowly, but that's unlikely.

One word, Microsoft. I know people like to treat economics like physics, but it's more a branch of psychology; it doesn't work logically.

AlexDawson
—
2010-08-25T06:03:44Z —
#17

Chroniclemaster1 said:

I appreciate your opinion Alex, but given all the people who think Google is out of it's mind on this one, I'm still deeply concerned.

I'm not saying I'm not concerned, I'm a firm supporter of net neutrality, but I think the whole situation is being blown out of proportion on the basis of a very loosely defined 2 page scribble which isn't specific in the slightest, which is precisely what the document is... it's not a set of guidelines or rules, it's an overview memo.

Chroniclemaster1 said:

Is Google innocent? Could be that they're just stupid and not handling their press releases properly. They wouldn't be the first big company to spawn an unnecessary scandal by bad PR management.

I think Google released a sketch of their views and people focused entirely on what was omitted, not what was stated as if it were set in stone.

Jerrac said:

Second, the internet has been built by private companies. They built the infrastructure. They spent a lot of money to get the technology created. To be blunt, they own it. If the government starts infringing on the big companies property rights, how long will it be before mine are taken away?

Jerrac, get your facts straight, the Internet was originally conceived and built by DARPA with funding from the US government and the WWW was developed by CERN which also gets government funding from several nations. The infrastructure was not built by a bunch of dot com investors.

Jerrac said:

Third, would you really rather have the Government in charge of the net? Seriously? The only effect that would have is to make things worse. I'd much rather have a big company that I know will be seeking to get as much money from me as they can, than have a government playing games with all kinds of hard to understand regulations. Those regulations would be supposed to do what the government says they do, but would actually do another. That is what happens with most Laws. To give the Government more authority would be utterly stupid.

You do realise that laws still apply to the net so it's not as "free" of a place as you would make it out too be. Intellectual Property law is a perfect example, as is human rights regulations (to try and put an end to sick stuff like kiddie porn), or are you in favour of making the web a true "anything goes" society?

Chroniclemaster1 said:

Further, if your competitor pays more money than you do, then they receive additional considerations, better technologies, faster download speeds that they can offer users, or even eliminating your content entirely. A big problem with the Google rules is that they allow ISPs to "restrict" content for legal and copyright reasons.

That already happens worldwide, or have you not heard of bandwidth throttling or caps (to maintain a stable service for all customers), people being kicked off for violating terms of service agreements, tiered service plans (like you pay different amounts for dial-up, DSL, satellite, fibre, T-lines, OC backbones, etc). What you are talking about has been instated for years by many nations, as has restricting content like child porn on the basis of legal and human rights situations.

Ed_Seedhouse
—
2010-08-24T00:24:41Z —
#18

Just because google wasn't crap to start with doesn't mean that it can't evolve into crap after a few years, as it generally seems to me to be doing these days. Soon enough it will be the next Microsoft I judge.

chimpzilla
—
2010-08-23T20:45:29Z —
#19

JJMcClure said:

AOL Search, AltaVista, Lycos, HotBot, Excite came and went because they were crap, Google isn't crap so that rule of thumb may not apply as directly as you'd imagine. It's going to take something very special to replace Google and it will probably be something they invented themselves anyway.

Sadly, Google will probably just buy up whatever competition might spring up. Also I prefer AltaVista search results, and recently started using them again. The only thing Google really offers me at this point is free mail and an advertising platform. However, I'm pretty sure they make most of their money being an advertising platform so they win there.